Talk:Homeland Security says Minneapolis woman shot by ICE officer dies

Review of revision 4970811 [Passed]

Revision 4970811 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 20:25, January 7, 2026 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Added a brief, sourced paragraph to provide balancing context and resolve neutrality concerns without changing the focal event. This pushed the boundary of what is ordinarily considered independent review, but was done in the spirit of WN:IAR — “If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikinews, ignore it.” The additions were limited, fully attributed, and policy-driven. Also replaced an unsupported quote with a verified one, made minor copy-edits for accuracy and tone, removed own verification tags and HTML comments, added categories and an infobox, and clarified wording for neutrality. As this is Breaking, please keep an eye out for inaccuracies in our reporting or changes to our source articles. The article can be expanded with new facts and sources post-publication. We should remove the 'Breaking' hat note after 24 hours or so. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4970811 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 20:25, January 7, 2026 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Added a brief, sourced paragraph to provide balancing context and resolve neutrality concerns without changing the focal event. This pushed the boundary of what is ordinarily considered independent review, but was done in the spirit of WN:IAR — “If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikinews, ignore it.” The additions were limited, fully attributed, and policy-driven. Also replaced an unsupported quote with a verified one, made minor copy-edits for accuracy and tone, removed own verification tags and HTML comments, added categories and an infobox, and clarified wording for neutrality. As this is Breaking, please keep an eye out for inaccuracies in our reporting or changes to our source articles. The article can be expanded with new facts and sources post-publication. We should remove the 'Breaking' hat note after 24 hours or so. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

-- Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 20:26, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Help expanding breaking news

I understand this isn't exactly in-line with what Bddpaux suggested here, but its similar. The original article submitted for review was only the first paragraph (with some changes during review). I added the second paragraph from already-listed sources, to add balance.

Now I think others could step in and use the Wiki process to expand and improve a Breaking news article in a way we haven't really done before. I will have time throughout the day today to check back in on changes.

Pinging some active contributors: @BigKrow, @Lofi Gurl, @User:Metropolitan90, @OmegaMantis to see if anyone wants to jump in.Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 20:35, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

I added some info on the claims of officials regarding accounts a few hours ago, it is pending review. OmegaMantis (talk) 23:26, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

@OmegaMantis and @BigKrow, changes reviewed and sighted (approved).Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 00:07, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Tomorrow morning, PST I will correct the tense of the third paragraph making it past tense and also removing the "breaking" notice.Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 00:08, 8 January 2026 (UTC)